What it changes for boards and managers

EV approval packets need editing, not just re-reading. The additional-insured requirement appears in a great many California association EV charging policies, architectural application forms and CC&R amendment templates, because it was in the statute and everyone copied it. It is now unenforceable, and a form that still demands it is asking owners for something the association cannot require.

The certificate obligation is the one that remains, and it is the harder one. Associations tend to focus on the additional-insured line because it was the conspicuous one. The recurring obligation is the annual certificate, and it is the one associations most often fail to track — a one-time delivery at approval is easy, a perpetual annual cycle across every installed station is not.

Nothing in section 4745 gives the association a mechanism to compel a certificate. The tracking system is the association's to build.

The distinction being drawn is a real one. Naming the association as an additional insured extends the owner's policy to cover the association directly. Requiring a certificate confirms the owner carries coverage without extending it. The Legislature kept the confirmation and removed the extension.

Associations that were relying on additional-insured status as a defence layer should raise the change with their own broker rather than assuming the master policy answer is unchanged.

The 60-day deemed approval is unaltered and still catches boards. Silence approves. A board deferring an EV application pending an electrical capacity study, without issuing a written denial, faces automatic approval at day 61.

Two amendments in two years, on the same section

SB 1267, presented to the Governor on August 30, 2026, would amend section 4745 again. Its provisions are substantial:

Associations would get civil liability protection for charging stations they do not own, except for gross negligence. Owner responsibility would extend to damage arising from the use of the station — the current statute reaches installation, maintenance, repair, removal and replacement, but not use. The obligation would run to successive owners. And the NEMA standard plug exemption from the coverage requirement would be carried forward.

It passed the Senate concurrence vote 40–0 and, unusually among this session's common interest development bills, was supported rather than opposed by CAI-CLAC — it reduces association exposure rather than expanding association duties. It is not law; the Governor must act by September 30, 2026.

The practical consequence of two consecutive amendments is that any EV policy template dated before 2026 is out of date in at least one respect, and possibly two. The operative text of section 4745, not a summary or a form, is what governs.

The construction-code layer nobody mentions

Section 4745 governs what an association must permit when a member asks. It is not the only EV obligation reaching California common interest developments.

The 2025 edition of CALGreen, Title 24 Part 11, took effect January 1, 2026, and carries EV infrastructure requirements for multifamily construction — including on additions and alterations, which is the path that reaches existing communities. An association repaving a garage or performing electrical work on a parking structure may trigger EV-readiness obligations on the altered spaces.

That is a capital planning and reserve study question rather than a member-request question, and it is analytically separate from section 4745. Boards planning parking or garage work should ask their contractor which CALGreen provisions the scope triggers before the project is bid, because the answer changes the budget.

What to watch next

The Governor's decision on SB 1267 by September 30. If it is signed, its operative date is January 1, 2027, and the annual certificate-tracking obligation acquires a second layer — successor owners — that associations will need to capture at transfer through the resale disclosure process.